Category: Blackjack

Top Ten Signs You’ve Been in Vegas Too Long

by Rebecca Richfield
(From Blackjack Forum Volume XIX #1, Spring 1999)
© Blackjack Forum 1999

You know you’ve been in Las Vegas too long when…

10. Dealers and other players start asking you where you work.

9. You actually come close to using some of those comp show tickets.

8. The teller at your bank’s local branch no longer asks for your ID.

7. Although your standards for “dirty” continue to slide, you have a laundry near a casino you think of as “yours.”

6. You’ve awakened from at least one dream where you were held hostage by a gun-wielding Debby Reynolds, Wayne Newton, or Steve Wynn.

5. You need an extra suitcase for your stash of hotel toiletries.

4. Daily fluffing and buffing seems like too much trouble. As you abandon shaving, make-up, and jewelry, your reflection looks amazingly like the stereotypical counter.

3. You take to carrying a hotel shower cap for surreptitiously wrapping buffet brownies to take to your room.

2. You’ve been to a mall—even if it was just to buy clean underwear. (drum roll, please)

1. You’ve stopped ordering an appetizer and dessert with every entrée when on a coffee shop comp.

—Rebecca Richfield (who didn’t reach this stage till week nine.) ♠

by Arnold Snyder
[From Blackjack Forum Vol. XI #1, March 1991]
© 1991 Blackjack Forum

[Editor’s Note: The complete Over/Under Report is now available free at the link below. I’m posting this article under Blackjack History because it describes how exciting and valuable this side-bet was to card counters in the early years of its existence. It also provides some of the early computer simulations of the bet in various games with various numbers of decks. I’m not aware of any casinos that still offer this bet, although there is an occasional report of a casino that offers it with a continuous shuffle machine, making the counting system irrelevant. – A.S.]

It’s been a year and a half now since I published my Over/Under Report. Since that time, the number of casinos offering the over/under rule at their blackjack tables has continued to climb. Not a few serious players have also discovered the many cruise ships that are offering the over-under rule.

Since cruise ship games are typically heat-free, allowing min-to-max spreads without countermeasures, card counters who can afford $100 bets are finding that the potential win on “cruises to nowhere” more than justifies the cruise expense. Prior to the introduction of the over/under rule, the otherwise lousy rules on cruise ships, always in shoe games and usually with unexceptional penetration, failed to attract serious players.

According to Caesars Tahoe pit boss, Ken Perrie, who invented the over/under rule and markets the distinctive over/under table layout, more and more casinos all over the world will be opening over/under tables in the near future.

The Huxley Corporation (London) handles marketing of the over/under rule in foreign casinos. They report sales of over/under table layouts to casinos in Yugoslavia, Poland, Turkey, Czechoslovakia, South Africa, Canada and the Isle of Man.

Ken Perrie is currently negotiating with casinos in the Bahamas and Aruba to begin testing the over/under rule on some tables. He has also been negotiating with all of the Atlantic City casinos to begin field testing over/under games. Two riverboat casinos running out of Iowa now have the over/under rule on all blackjack tables—the President’s Cruise Line and the Dubuque Belle.

There are also 10 to 20 over/under tables scattered throughout various of the Deadwood, South Dakota casinos. As previously reported, the Ojibwa Indian Reservation Casino in upper Michigan also has over/under tables.

All of the blackjack tables on the Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines ships now offer over/under bets, as do all tables on the Dolphin Cruise Lines. The Carnival Cruise Lines have some over/under tables available on all ships. The Norwegian Cruise lines, Kloster Cruise Lines, Atlantic Maritime Cruise Lines, and Princess Cruise Lines offer over/under games on some, but not all, ships.

In Northern Nevada, you’ll find over/under tables at Caesars Tahoe, Hyatt Lake Tahoe, and coming soon to Harrah’s (Stateline), Harvey’s and the Horizon (formerly High Sierra). In Reno, over/under bets are still offered on all tables at the Comstock Casino and on one two-decker at the Peppermill. The Comstock has recently undergone a management change, and according to one dealer, their over/under games will be restricted to the new shoe games they are installing.

Bally’s has taken out one of their two over/under tables and the other is reportedly open only in the evenings. You’ll also find an over/under table at Stockmans (in Fallon) and at the Red Garter (in Wendover).

In Las Vegas, you’ll find over/under tables at Caesars Palace, the Golden Nugget (which has more over/under tables coming—hopefully with higher limits!), the Holiday, Whiskey Pete’s, the Silver Nugget, and coming soon to the Tropicana.

In the fifteen years I’ve been observing casino blackjack, I don’t recall any new rule spreading so fast or so widely. The reasons for the popularity of the rule are many. It’s an easy rule for players to comprehend; it’s easy for dealers to incorporate into the game; it has no significant effect on any other aspect of the game; from the players’ perspective it’s an attractive betting option; from the casinos’ perspective, the house edge is four to five times higher on over/under bets than on the regular blackjack hand.

Frequently Asked Questions About the Over Under Report

The Over Under rule attracts amateur counters and wannabe counters like flies because it seems so easy to beat. In fact, very few over/under bettors make any money on their over/under bets. Standard blackjack card counting systems just don’t work very well for over/under bets.

I’ve been receiving many letters from players who have purchased, or are considering purchasing, my Over/Under Report. I’ve recently used John Imming’s RWC simulation software to answer the three most common technical questions I get.

Question #1: “All of the predicted win rates in your Over/Under Report are derived by mathematical analysis using your calculated effects of removal with Hi-Opt I frequency distributions. I’d love to believe your estimates, but couldn’t you run some computer simulations to back up your predictions?”

Using the RWC software to test the 1- and 2-deck Reno games, with both 67% and 75% shuffle points, what follows are the win rates after 40+ million hands each, using the Over/Under Count, as published in the Over/Under Report. I used a flat-bet strategy, a 1-to-2 spread, and a 1-to-4 spread.

RENO ONE-DECK
	Flat	1-to-2	1-to-4
67% dealt:	1.66%	2.49%	3.25%
75% dealt:	2.15%	2.97%	3.62%

RENO TWO-DECK
	Flat	1-to-2	1-to-4
67% dealt:	0.53%	1.12%	1.70%
75% dealt:	0.87%	1.55%	2.16%

You can see here why I advise counters in hand-held over/under games to flat bet, especially if there’s decent penetration. You can get a healthy edge with a flat bet and you’re less likely to wear out your welcome.

Caesars Tahoe has 6-deck over/under tables. They’ve also recently made their rules better: Vegas Strip rules with double after splits and late surrender (just like Caesars Palace in Las Vegas). The following chart shows what the over/under count gets in the Caesars game. The over/under count surrender indices were not published in the Over/Under Report. Use these:

OVER/UNDER COUNT SURRENDER INDICES
	9	X	A
16	+1	-2	-1
15	+3	-1	+2
14		+3

CAESARS TAHOE 6-DECK
	Flat	1-to-2	1-to-4
67% dealt:	0.01%	0.22%	0.57%
75% dealt:	0.18%	0.50%	0.97%

I also simulated the standard (no surrender) 8-deck Atlantic City game, with the typical 2 decks cut off (75% penetration), but I put in the over/under option:

ATLANTIC CITY 8-DECK
	Flat	1-to-2	1-to-4
75% dealt:	-0.06%	0.20%	0.55%

If you compare these computer simulated win rates with those predicted in the Over/Under Report via mathematical analysis, you’ll find that the mathematical analyses were quite accurate.

The next most common question I get is: “Wouldn’t it be helpful to know the over/under indices for ‘standard’ card counting systems? I use the Hi-Lo Count, and I can’t see learning a whole new counting system for the few over/under games available. How much potential gain is there for the Hi-Lo Count with optimal over/under bets?”

Using the Hi-Lo Count, you should place the over bet if your true count is +5 or higher, and you should place the under bet if your true count is -8 or below. Let’s compare the win rates of a player using the Hi-Lo Count with and without these over/under indices in the 6-deck Caesars Tahoe game (using Wong’s Professional Blackjack strategy indices for other playing decisions), along with the win rates of a player using the Over/Under Count, as published in the Over/Under Report.

This is how the count values compare:

COMPARISON OF COUNT VALUES
	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	X	A
Hi-Lo	+1	+1	+1	+1	+1	0	0	0	-1	-1
O/U	+1	+1	+1	0	0	0	0	0	-1	+1

And, these are the win rates:

CAESARS TAHOE 6-DECK (75% PEN)
	Flat	1-to-2	1-to-4
Hi-Lo (no o/u)	-0.23%	+0.05%	+0.41%
Hi-Lo (with o/u)	-0.14%	+0.16%	+0.52%
O/U	+0.18%	+0.50%	+0.97%

So, in this 6-deck game, a Hi-Lo counter can get about a tenth of a percent extra if over/under bets are allowed. Hi-Lo players should note that there is virtually no gain whatsoever on the under bets.

Although the under bet should be placed at a true count of -8 or below, which rarely occurs, you should not increase your bet until your true count is -11 or below, which will almost never occur in a shoe game. Until your count gets to -11, the expected loss on your blackjack hand exceeds the expected gain on the under bet. From -8 to -10, the under bet just acts as a hedge to reduce your loss.

For this reason, if you typically table-hop with the Hi-Lo Count, you should continue to do so in over/under games, but take advantage of the over bet at +5 or higher. With the Zen Count, place the over bet at a true count of +6 or more. With Hi-Opt I, make the over bet at +4 or more.

If you side-count aces, with an ace-neutral count (like Hi-Opt I), adjust your ace into the plus count cards for over/under bets. If you side count aces with an ace-negative count (such as the Hi-Lo), double the adjustment you usually make to neutralize the ace, so that the value applied to the ace is reversed to a plus count. (If this doesn’t make sense to you, you probably shouldn’t be attempting to side count aces!)

If you find yourself playing in over/under games frequently, you should probably learn the Over/Under Count. The potential gains are that substantial.

With or without the over/under bets, a Hi-Lo counter would not want to sit through all negative counts in this 6-deck game with a small spread. An Over/Under counter may obtain a decent win rate in this game, even sitting through the negatives with a small spread. Deeper penetration would be desirable for any counter (natch!).

An Unbalanced Card Counting System for the Over Under Bet

The third most common question I get is “Can’t you develop an unbalanced running count system for the over/under bets? I’ve gotten so used to the ease of the Red 7 Count that true count adjustments and strategy tables put me off.”

The main problem here is that I can’t come up with any easy running count method that will take advantage of both the over and under bets. Using the RWC simulation analyses, however, it’s easy to see that even with the over/under count, the significant gains in multi-deck over/under games come from the over bets. Since most of the over/under games available in casinos are shoe games, we can develop running count systems for taking advantage of the over bet only.

Here are three unbalanced running count systems that will work very well on over bets in multi-deck games:

COMPARISON OF COUNT VALUES
	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	X	A
Sys. 1:	+1	+1	+1	+1	0	0	0	0	-1	+1
Sys. 2:	+1	+1	+1	0	0	0	0	0	-1	+2
Sys. 3:	+2	+1	+1	0	0	0	0	-1	-1	+2

If you are familiar with the Red 7 Count (from Blackbelt in Blackjack), these counts work the same way, except that in each of these systems, the “pivot” equals 4 times the number of decks. In other words, in a 4-deck game, the pivot equals +16, while in a 2-deck game, the pivot equals +8, and so on.

All betting and strategy decisions for these counts are made at the running count pivot. In other words, at the pivot or higher, raise your bet, take insurance, place the over bet, and alter these basic strategy decisions:

Stand on 16 vs. 9, X and A

Stand on 15 vs. X

Stand on 12 vs. 2 & 3

Double down on 10 or A vs. A

Surrender 15 vs. 9 and A

Surrender 14 vs. X

Use basic strategy for all other decisions.

This is an easy system to remember. In the 6-deck game, all betting and strategy changes occur at a running count of +24.

I computer tested System #3, which is the best of these counts, in the 6-deck Caesars Tahoe game. We’ll call this unbalanced running count system the “Over Count,” as opposed to the “Over/Under Count,” and compare it to both the Over/Under Count and the Hi-Lo (with the optimal Hi-Lo over/under indices +5 and -8).

CAESARS TAHOE 6-DECK (75% PEN)
	Flat	1-to-2	1-to-4
O/U:	+0.18%	+0.50%	+0.97%
Over:	-0.03%	+0.31%	+0.80%
Hi-Lo:	-0.14%	+0.16%	+0.52%

So, even though the unbalanced Over Count is placing no under bets, the gains on the over bets are so substantial that the player may play basic strategy through all negative counts and still get the lion’s share of the potential gains in this game.

A player using the Over Count would enjoy even more substantial gains if table hopping to avoid negative counts. Despite the fact that the Over Count is a level-two counting system (aces and deuces count +2), in my opinion it is quite a bit simpler to learn and play than either the Over/Under Count or the Hi-Lo. With just a few strategy decisions that change at the same running count, as professional level systems go, this one’s a piece of cake.

The unbalanced Over/Under Count is also effective, but substantially less effective, than the Over/Under Count in hand-held games. These are the single-deck win rates:

RENO 1-DECK, 67% Dealt
	Flat	1-to-2	1-to-4
O/U:	1.66%	2.49%	3.25%
Over:	0.93%	1.60%	2.17%

RENO 1-DECK, 75% Dealt
	Flat	1-to-2	1-to-4
O/U	2.15%	2.97%	3.62%
Over:	1.28%	2.05%	2.69%

So, if you ever play single-deck over/under games, I’d advise learning the Over/Under Count with the complete set of strategy indices published in the Over/Under Report. The simplified Over Count will take substantial gains in this game, but no running count system is comparable to a balanced true count system for hand-held games.

One other question I’m frequently asked, which I’m going to answer succinctly without charts and tables: “Can I use the Over/Under Count for regular blackjack games that don’t offer over/under bets?”

Unfortunately, unless you normally play in deeply dealt single-deck games with a small spread, this is not advisable. Both the Over/Under Count and the Over Count correlate poorly to your betting decisions in regular blackjack games. If you find it impossible to learn and use two different counting systems, one for regular blackjack and one for over/under blackjack, then you’re going to have to make some kind of compromise.

Maybe you should just stick with your regular counting system and take the small gains available with over bets when available. Maybe you should learn to side count aces so that you may adjust the ace to the plus or minus side as appropriate to the game. Maybe you should take up gin rummy. The casinos are putting more and more of these over/under tables in because they are beating the majority of the players who place over/under bets, including the card counters.

The fact remains that if you have access to over/under games, and you know how to play them, these games offer the most profitable opportunities for card counters to be found anywhere. ♠

Dealer Tips and Faulty Logic: To Toke or Not to Toke

by Arnold Snyder
(From Card Player, May 6, 1991)
© 1991 Arnold Snyder

The first article I ever wrote for a gambling periodical was on dealer tips. I wrote it in October 1980, for Rouge Et Noir News, and later included the article in my book, Blackbelt in Blackjack, as Chapter 12: Toking Guidelines.

Now I don’t expect every card counter on earth to have read my book, and I sure don’t expect many to have read an issue of Rouge Et Noir News that’s now more than 10 years old. But it kills me that so many otherwise intelligent blackjack players still don’t understand the mathematics of toking.

Let’s acknowledge that blackjack dealers make their living from tokes. If they don’t get tokes, they starve. If you like a dealer and you win any sizable amount of money, you should toke as a matter of common courtesy, just as you’d toke a waitress or the valet who parks your car. In general, try to size your tips so that they add up, over time, to a fixed small percentage of the expected value from your play.

I’ve known low-stakes card counters who were trying to go pro who realized they were tipping the dealer almost their full ev. Bad way to go pro.

Bad Reasons to Tip the Dealer

The reason for this article is that many card counters have this weird view of toking. They see it as part of their playing strategy. The usual belief is that by toking the dealer, the player can buy a more profitable card counting game for himself. The way I hear it most often, the player says something like, “The count was through the roof and the dealer was about to shuffle. So I matched my $50 bet with a $5 bet for the dealer to get another round.”

Exactly how stupid this strategy is depends to some extent on the precise definition of “through the roof.” But the fact remains that this is an ignorant ploy. Even in the most deeply dealt single-deck blackjack games, the player will almost never see a 10% advantage. With a common, level-one card counting system, and Las Vegas Strip rules, a 10% advantage would correspond to a true count per deck of about +20.

If you did have this theoretical 10% advantage, however, with a $50 bet on the table you would expect to win about $5, which is 10% of your bet. Of course, it’s impossible to win exactly $5 on one $50 bet at blackjack. Your real world possibilities on this hand are to lose $50, to win $50, to push, to win $75 (with a blackjack), or to win or lose $100 or more (with pair splits and/or double-downs— though these wins/losses require an additional investment on your part over and above your initial $50).

Over the long haul, however, if you tally up all of the results from your $50 bets with a 10% advantage, you’ll show a win rate of about $5 for every $50 bet. That’s what a 10% advantage is. So, if you’re betting $5 for the dealer to deal this hand, you’re giving him all of your potential profit. You’re wasting your time playing the hand and risking negative bankroll fluctuations for no expected profit whatsoever.

The sad fact is that card counters who try to buy deeper penetration from a dealer with tokes are rarely in 10% advantage situations. More often than not, a high count will indicate a player advantage between 1% and 3%, depending on the game. Toking from $1 to $3 for every $100 bet gives you the same break-even expectation, because you’re virtually handing your total potential profit to the dealer. Most players who toke to get an extra round are often giving the dealer more than their expectation.

Toking to get an extra round almost never makes sense. Even if you are a black chip player, willing to give up a small percentage of a potential win to a dealer, you can’t insult the dealer by betting 50¢ for him when you’ve got a couple hundred dollars bet for yourself.

Furthermore, how often do your tokes actually achieve the purpose of getting an extra round? Many dealers would not comprehend that you’re trying to buy an extra round, because they don’t know you’re a card counter, they don’t know the count is high, and they don’t assume that a bet for them means “deal one more round.” You have to further reduce your expectation when the dealer innocently shuffles away the extra round you thought you were purchasing.

Or, are you going to be a real boor and pull back your bet, including the dealer’s toke, when he shuffles the cards? An amateur move like this will get you real far as a card counter. You might as well hang a picture of Ken Uston around your neck.

Tipping the Dealer for Tells

Then there are players who toke for tells, and believe that by throwing money at a dealer, the dealer will “help” them play their hands. Let’s say you’re playing in one of the few remaining casinos where dealers still peek under 10’s. And, let’s say you actually have found a dealer who’s crooked enough to play your hand for you if you’ve got a bet out for him. What’s it worth to you?

If it goes on for any length of time, you’ll probably get a free trip to the Nevada State Penitentiary, after the eye-in-the-sky video of your playing session gets shown in court. Working in collusion with a casino dealer is a felony in Nevada, with a minimum sentence of one year in prison.

When Tipping the Dealer Pays

Tipping the dealer can pay off in particular circumstances. If you’re a shuffle tracker, for example, you can often buy the cut card by putting out a bet with a tip for the dealer as she’s finishing the shuffle. In that circumstance, you’re paying for a big advantage through an entire slug, not just one hand.

Tipping is also good camouflage if you play at the highest stakes, if you don’t overpay. Again, make sure that your overall tipping remains a small percentage of your overall ev.

Just remember, the truth of the matter is that the majority of players who toke for favors get nothing. And although many players may be unaware of the law in Nevada (at least, this would be their defense in court), dealers are not. Toking a blackjack dealer in order to get a more profitable game is like giving a waiter a buck and hoping he’ll steal some desert from the kitchen so you don’t have to pay for it.

The only thing a blackjack dealer is “selling” is a friendly game, carefully dealt, according to house rules and procedures. If that’s what he delivers, you toke according to your means.

Send 10% of all the money you save in stupid tokes after reading this column to The Bishop. ♠

Blackjack Team Play Strategies

by Arnold Snyder
(From Blackjack Forum Volume XVI #3, Fall 1996)
© 1996 Blackjack Forum

There are numerous approaches that a blackjack team might take to beat the tables. There is no “best” approach, as the optimum strategy for any blackjack team will depend on numerous variables, notably: the number of team players, the talents of the various players, the size of the team bankroll, and the specific games that are being attacked.

The scope of this article will be to lead you in the directions that blackjack team strategies might take, not to provide comprehensive instructions on exactly how various team members might function at the tables.

In Ken Uston’s books, notably The Big Player and Million Dollar Blackjack, you will find some fairly comprehensive blackjack team attack methods initially invented by Al Francesco, including everything from bet-sizing guidelines to camouflage tactics to the precise sets of team signals employed during the operations.

This type of information is good to read for ideas, but it is important that you learn to develop your own methods when it comes to the details of your precise strategies. You always want to do some things a little different from what others have done.

A blackjack team with little creativity is unlikely to last. Be flexible. Always be ready to change those things that aren’t working. Throw around ideas with your teammates. Discuss problems continually, and work out solutions. Try new approaches. Get creative.

The most successful blackjack operations are those that continually change. Conditions vary so much in different casinos that you cannot always use the same modus operandi. If there was one stock blackjack team methodology, the casinos would catch onto it in no time. Look at this article as a starting point for your method of attack. Your ultimate success will depend on how well your blackjack team develops its own approach.

Every Man For Himself Blackjack Teams

The simplest team approach is the EMFH approach, or Every Man for Himself. This approach is viable with virtually any size blackjack team or bank. Because of its simplicity of execution, it’s also one of the most popular team approaches.

An EMFH team is dependent on each team member being a competent card counter who is capable of beating the tables. This type of blackjack team approach requires the highest level of trust among the participants, as it is essentially a simple agreement to share a common bankroll and all playing results.

For instance, three close friends, all of whom are card counters, might each contribute $10,000 to a common bank so that each of the three may play off of a $30,000 team bank. They need not play together, nor in the same casino(s), nor even in the same cities, nor at the same time.

Such a blackjack team might make a simple agreement to set a win target of $15,000, and to distribute profits when the target is hit, proportionately on the actual hours of play of each player. This type of agreement allows maximum flexibility for the participants. Technically, they need not ever even see each other. Over a six month period, one California player might get in 80 hours of play in Las Vegas, while another — who lives in Florida — gets in 65 hours in Louisiana and Mississippi, while the New Yorker gets 110 hours in Atlantic City. Actual playing times will be at the convenience of the blackjack team members.

An EMFH blackjack team can coordinate all operations over the phone, wire–transferring funds if necessary. Such a team has no hassle of coordinating attacks on specific casinos/shifts, no possibilities of signal mix–ups, and no risk of being identified as team players with each other.

The prime requirement for this type of effort is absolute trust in each other. This type of team cannot succeed unless all members are absolutely honest with each other — re: hours of play, win/loss results, expenses, etc. There also must be a vigilant effort on the part of all team members to regularly update each other on play results, so that all are kept abreast of the actual size of the team bank.

EMFH teams only work with players who trust each other’s counting talents and abilities to assess game conditions for profit potential. Given these criteria, such teams can be operated successfully with as few or as many players as can meet these criteria. Most such teams, however, remain small.

Two Person Blackjack Teams

Another very popular approach to team play is the two-person team. This type of team often consists of players who play together at a table, without any attempt to disguise the fact that they are together. Since it is common for male/female couples to play together, and not uncommon for any two friends, same sex or not, to sit together and play blackjack, a two–person team does not necessarily need to hide the fact that they know each other.

There are many viable approaches for maximizing the profit potential of a two–person team. This type of team need not consist of two card counters. A single talented player can use discreet signals (verbal or non–verbal) to tell the other player how to play/bet. In the case of male/female couples, this can usually be done quite openly, without the need for signals, as couples often help each other play their hands.

Male/female teams can also use their “couple” status simply to increase the betting spread. During uncrowded times, female companions may sit at the table without playing a hand, and this appears very natural (because it is; you see this all the time in casinos). It is also quite common for such a female companion to occasionally grab some of her husband’s/boyfriend/s chips and play a hand or two. This can effectively double the betting spread of a single player without appearing to.

Two person teams which consist of two talented players can also utilize their counting abilities to enhance their profits beyond what either might be able to accomplish individually. For instance, at single-deck games, one player might use a traditional point count system, while the other keeps a perfect insurance count (tens vs. non-tens). Or one player might keep a side count of aces. Or one player might keep the High-Low (for betting) while the other keeps Hi-Opt I (for playing strategy). Usually rules such as over/under or Royal Match, which require non-traditional counting systems, can also be more effectively attacked by two-person teams.

More advanced players might also try various shuffle tracking strategies. Having two-players at the table not only mentally frees one brain from traditional counting chores, but it also doubles the probability to getting the cut card.

Two-person team approaches in which the players do not appear to know each other can also be quite effective. A “Gorilla BP” strategy, in which a big money player pays little attention to the game, obviously not counting cards, but in fact playing/betting very accurately via signals from a small stakes “stranger” at the table, is very deceptive and effective.

A two-person team which consists of two talented counters can also use a “rotating BP” approach, in which the players take turns back-counting tables to call each other into hot games; or competent shuffle trackers could alternate shuffle-tracking tables, calling each other in at the hot slugs (or off the top when they can get the cut card), using signals to indicate the size/position/value of the slug.

Two person teams, because they are so often composed of close friends and/or real life couples, have a high rate of success. When two players are using a strategy where they are playing at the same table, they also eliminate worries about win/loss reporting, as they both witness the results.

Big Player/Spotter Blackjack Teams

Larger teams often use a “spotter” approach to team play. A spotter is a low stakes player or often a non–player who is simply watching the games, who “calls in” a big player (BP) via signals. Ken Uston wrote fairly extensively about this approach (The Big Player, 1976, and Million Dollar Blackjack, 1981), crediting Al Francesco with having invented it in the early 1970’s.

Despite the fact that this method has been so widely publicized, it is still used successfully today. The only effective countermeasure to the BP approach is restricting mid-shoe entry. This is done in some casinos, especially in Atlantic City where they can’t bar counters, but it is one of those countermeasures that costs the house dearly. The vast majority of players who want to enter mid-shoe are just regular (unskilled) players. And many high rollers like to change tables at whim. Restricting mid-shoe entry eliminates a lot of action from the tables, so most casinos (wisely) reject this countermeasure.

BP/spotter teams generally work best during crowded playing times, when lots of players are wandering around. Signals must be both subtle (natural gestures) and easy to see. If a complex set of signals is required, much time must be spent practicing before attempting to engage such a strategy in a casino BJ pit.

I would advise any players considering a BP/spotter team approach to start small (maybe half a dozen players), and allow the team to build gradually. BP/spotter approaches look great on paper, but can be quite confusing in a chaotic casino environment.

When starting out, you must prearrange short sessions (not more than an hour or two), so that you may reconvene with your teammates to discuss problems, missed signals, or any aspect of the approach that seems not to be working. On your initial sessions, you may expect to be devising many new signals for previously unanticipated situations you’ve encountered. You must maintain flexibility during your initial sessions to work out these fine details.

Because of the success of Uston’s blackjack books, the casinos are well aware of this team approach, and do look out for it. Big money players who continually jump in and out of games should expect surveillance. This is one of the more difficult types of blackjack team operations to coordinate, because the combined talents of so many individuals are necessary for success. There is often a great fun factor to participating in this type of team, however, as you will continue to get together with your teammates for discussions, practice sessions, money transfers, etc.

Tempers can flare when the team is losing, especially if any players begin to distrust the talents or honesty of any of their teammates. This type of team, more than any other, requires strong leadership, rigorous testing methods, and meticulous bookkeeping. With a large operation, money transfers may be frequent. All wins/losses and transactions must continually be recorded and updated. You must do this to avoid arguments about who had how much, who gave what to whom, etc.

It is also important that all members of the team understand that they do not know each other in the casino. It is also unsafe to meet in the casino coffee shop or restaurants, or any public areas of the hotel/casino(s) where you are playing, as pit personnel are liable to see you together. In many casinos, it is safe to meet in one of your hotel rooms, provided you arrive separately.

The Gorilla BP

A “gorilla BP” (another term from Ken Uston’s books) is a player who is not a card counter (or at least is not paying any attention to the cards during the play), but who makes all betting/playing decisions according to signals. The gorilla BP is often drinking heavily so that his erratic big bets appear to be more due to his Johnny Walker wisdom than anything else.

The danger of using gorilla BP’s is that they often really do get drunk, and they are probably carrying a large amount of team money. What do you do if your gorilla’s ability to read and follow signals diminishes dangerously? I’ve heard more than one story of such players who not only failed to heed playing/betting signals, but failed to leave the tables when given the “quit now” signal.

Another problem that sometimes arises with gorilla BP’s who really do get drunk, is that even if they can accurately follow signals, they are sometimes very obnoxious, and casinos today are not as comfortable with obnoxious drunks as they used to be. If your BP is irritating other players, spilling his drink on the table, offending the cocktail waitresses, etc., he may be asked to call it a night despite the fact he is betting big money. Casinos are much more image conscious today.

The gorilla BP approach works best when you have a high roller who is not a card counter, and who already has a long history of big money playing with a top rating in a casino. Such a player, especially if a known loser, can often get away with murder at the tables, and the pit will usually be happy to see him winning for a change.

I would suggest using this approach with a gorilla BP who can act drunk, with a drink in his hand, but not necessarily one who is drunk. This approach should probably be avoided with a large team of spotters, as you will continually lose track of the whereabouts of your gorilla, which can be scary if he’s really drunk. He might also attract thieves and pickpockets, another worry. He is also unlikely to know anything about his actual play results, how much he won or lost, etc. Gorilla BP strategies work much better with actors than with alcoholics.

Conclusion

Most successful team strategies could probably be categorized as one of the types listed above. Keep in mind that there are virtually hundreds of variations on the methods described, and thousands of possibilities when you consider that these approaches can often be combined with each other.

As suggested earlier, it is quite possible to utilize a gorilla BP approach with a two-person blackjack team playing at the same table. This is probably the safest way to utilize this concept. But it is just as possible to utilize a couple as joint BP’s in a spotter blackjack team operation. The variations are endless if you use your imagination. ♠

For an outstanding book on blackjack teams see Repeat Until Rich: A Professional Card Counter’s Chronicle of the Blackjack Wars by Josh Axelrad, a player and manager on one of the most aggressive, successful and notorious blackjack teams of the past decade.

Also see Blackjack Blueprint, by Rick Blaine, a former teammate of Arnold Snyder’s. For a novel about a player on a blackjack hole-card team, see Risk of Ruin, by Arnold Snyder.

Interview with a Surveillance Director

by Arnold Snyder
(From Blackjack Forum Vol. XXI #4, Winter 2001/02)
© 2002 Blackjack Forum Online

[I asked a casino surveillance director if he would do an interview for Blackjack Forum. I told him he could be anonymous. No name. No pictures. Any question I asked about surveillance that he didn’t want to answer, all he had to do was say so. We’d skip to the next one. I just asked that he give me whatever honest information on casino surveillance he could give for card counters and other professional gamblers.

What follows is a transcript, almost verbatim, of the interview. He answered every question I asked. The only portions I removed were sections where he had second thoughts after he had responded. He asked me not to print these few remarks, not because of the sensitivity of the information provided, but because he felt his responses might reveal his identity to some other casino surveillance people who knew him.]

Q. How long have you been working in casino surveillance?

A. I’ve worked in surveillance for about fifteen years. I’ve worked in nine casinos of which three are on the Las Vegas Strip, where I am currently working.

Q. Have you worked in any other casino industry jobs?

A. I broke in as a dealer in the early 70s and dealt for four… five years. Then I was promoted to the floor and stayed there for four years. Around 1981, I became a pit boss, which I quit after three years because of the politics. Later on, in 1986, I took a position in surveillance and never left. I like it.

Q. Have you ever been a serious player, such as a card counter or other type of gambling pro?

A. No. I never was a serious player but I have dear friends who are and when I do play I will only play with an advantage.

Q. Can you explain that?

A. I’d rather not.

Q. In a major Strip casino, how many surveillance personnel are on staff, that would be on duty on a busy Saturday night, as opposed to a slow weekday morning?

A. At my casino, on an average, there are anywhere up to five people on duty in the surveillance room, and on a slow night there will only be three, maybe four with the supervisor.

How Casino Surveillance Detects Professional Players

Q. How do you decide whom to watch from the eye in the sky?

A. A phone call from the pit. Usually a pit boss will call up and ask us to watch someone. Or if a player is a continuous winner over several trips he will be observed.

Q. How prevalent is computer software in analyzing blackjack players’ skill levels?

A. It’s used different amounts by different casinos. I am not a big fan of blackjack analysis software because camouflage plays could throw it off if you only look at a short session of play. I don’t know of any surveillance monitor operators who care for it, and some don’t even take it seriously.

Q. Is this type of software ever used by casinos to evaluate play for comp purposes?

A. No. Comps are based strictly on the game played, average wager, and the amount of time played. I think it’s outrageous that many casino pit personnel are ignorant of how to evaluate a player’s value, or potential value.

Say a new patron walks into a casino and plays roulette, 5.26% house advantage, for several hundred dollars a spin for five to six spins and then asks for a comp to the buffet. A floor supervisor then informs the player that he does not have enough play time. Where’s the logic?

Q. Is this surveillance software ever used “live,” in casinos, on blackjack games in progress, or is it only used later, on videos of play?

A. I don’t know anyone who can use it fast enough for live play, so usually it is done later with video playback.

Q. In detecting card counters, is the blackjack software faster and/or more accurate than human surveillance personnel trained to recognize card-counting strategies?

A. I personally feel nothing can take the place of a trained individual.

Q. If a player is winning big, will he automatically be evaluated?

A. No. But if bet spreads raise an eyebrow in the pit, then we will be notified and we might watch him. We will definitely bring the individual up on a monitor but that will not be our first priority if bet spreads and good basic strategy combined are not also factors.

Q. How much of a win, or how many hours of winning, will trigger an investigation of play in a Las Vegas casino?

A. In our casino as soon as someone is winning $5,000 we are notified.

Q. Will all blackjack players be evaluated for both card-counting and shuffle-tracking skills?

A. No. Shuffle-tracking is simply not understood by many casino employees. Everyone uses the term but couldn’t identify one. It is such a hard area to do well and even a harder area to detect. The fact is, few, if any, players can beat the shuffles.

Q. In a typical month in a major casino, how many players will be found to be card counters, shuffle trackers, and actual cheaters?

A. Card counters, we average six to seven a month. Shuffle trackers, about two to three, simply because they are in Biometrica as a tracker, not because we catch them.

Cheaters, about one to four in a month, usually slots, and half are usually employees stealing coins when filling the machines.

Casino Surveillance Services

Q. For casinos that subscribe to Griffin or Biometrica, is the service used extensively, say, on a daily basis?

A. Yes. As soon as we get a call from the pit about a patron, the first thing we do is see if the person is in Griffin or Biometrica. If he is, it makes our jobs easier.

Q. What percentage of major casinos would you estimate use Biometrica, Griffin, or both?

A. Eighty to ninety percent use Biometrica and I’d say forty percent use Griffin. Some casinos use both. This is based on talking to some of the other surveillance directors and is not a scientific estimate by any means. It seems to me Biometrica has really been taking over.

Q. Who in the casino decides if a player is to be added to Griffin or Biometrica?

A. We take a picture of the individual and state the reasons why we think this person is a counter, and the agencies decide whether or not to put him or her into the system. We can, however, send the individual’s picture directly to other casinos using Biometrica and ask them if anyone has information on the person.

Q. How well does Biometrica work, and what is the usage procedure?

A. Biometrica does work well in my opinion but, let’s face it, it is only as good as the people who use it. It is easier to use Biometrica because if we take a picture of a someone who is in the system the computer will find out who the person is because of the facial recognition device.

Q. Are players ever entered solely because of association with known card counters?

A. Absolutely. Guilt by association, I guess.

Q. If a player is in Griffin or Biometrica as a counter, is it assumed that the entry is correct, or will his play be watched?

A. If he’s in the book, he’s history.

Q. How do SINs (Surveillance Information Networks) work?

A. As soon as a person is a suspected undesirable a picture is taken and sent to all the other joints warning or asking about them.

Q. If a known pro counter is discovered in a Strip casino, will other Strip casinos be immediately notified?

A. Yes.

Q. If a player is winning inordinately, yet no explanation other than luck can be found, i.e., no counting, no tracking, no hole-card play, no devices, how long will the player be allowed to keep on winning? Is there some number of hours? Any dollar amount? Do all casinos have a pain-tolerance limit?

A. If the player is given a clean bill then we will keep letting him play, but with deterring methods — cutting shoes in half, changing dealers, and so on.

Q. If such a player is removed simply for inordinate wins, though nothing but luck presents an explanation, would such a player be a candidate for entry in Griffin or Biometrica?

A. No, because you have to explain to them why. But the individual will be in the house computer.

Q. Are players ever entered in Griffin or Biometrica simply because casino personnel dislike them?

A. No.

Casino Surveillance Skill Levels

Q. How competent would you say the average surveillance person is at detecting card counters, shuffle trackers, and hole-card players?

A. Card counters: An amateur counter will be caught immediately. A professional, with no outrageous spreads, camouflage at the right times, etcetera, will have some longevity. Shuffle trackers: not much chance of getting caught. Hole-card players: not much chance of getting caught — providing greed is not a factor. Really bizarre plays can give them away.

Q. Which casinos have the strongest surveillance departments? And the weakest?

A. I really can’t say because there are good individual surveillance personnel but people are always moving from joint to joint. However, even when the “good ones” are in the room, they can’t watch everything. Remember, we are not just concentrating on blackjack. We have the other games to watch, slots, markers, escorts, log books to fill out…

Q. Which casino games other than blackjack are of the most concern to surveillance?

A. Depends on the hold. If certain games aren’t holding what they should, we watch them for employee theft, biased wheels, etc.

Q. How much playing time, or number of hands, would be input in a Blackjack Survey Voice analysis to look for skillful play?

A. Generally, one to two shoes to look for a good plus count to see what that person did when the count was good.

Q. How often are outside consultants called to evaluate play?

A. Outside consultants are rarely called in to evaluate play. Usually all the casinos have a resident expert who does the evaluation. Out of all the consultants I have seen over the years, there have been only two who were worth their weight in gold. One is fully retired and enjoying family life, and the other works solely for the [deleted] organization.

Q. Do either Griffin or Biometrica offer play evaluation services?

A. No.

Q. Does Gaming Control ever evaluate play in Nevada?

A. I have never seen them do anything like that.

Casino Surveillance Pay Levels

Q. In a major Las Vegas casino, what is the pay scale for a floor person?

A. The pay varies from joint to joint. Obviously Caesars will pay more than Slots-A-Fun.

Q. On average, though, for a Strip casino, not the biggest and not the smallest, what does a floor man expect on his pay check?

A. $160 a day at the bigger joints. About twenty bucks an hour. It ranges from about $15 an hour at the smaller places on the Strip, to about $25 an hour at the top places.

Q. So, floor personnel get about $40 thousand a year. What about a pit boss?

A. Twice that. About $80 thousand per year. That’s at the top places. Maybe $60 thousand at the average Strip casinos.

Q. What about the shift manager?

A. A bit more than a boss. Maybe $90 thousand.

Q. How about the casino manager?

A. $120 thousand, plus bonuses.

Q. What about surveillance personnel?

A. I’m embarrassed to tell you.

Q. What’s the low end?

A. The monitor operators, all they do is sit in front of the screens all day and watch for anything suspicious, they hire in at $8 to $12 per hour. These are also the same personnel who input the Survey Voice data when a skill check is done.

Q. That pay sucks.

A. That’s the truth. And you get what you pay for. There’s little incentive to stay in this job. Nobody spends much time studying for it. Surveillance is a transition job.

Q. What’s the high end of surveillance pay?

A. The surveillance supervisor gets maybe $30 to $40 thousand a year. About the same as a floor man at most places. Pretty low on the salary scale for casino personnel. It’s still a transition job; you’re usually trying to get onto the floor so you can move up.

Q. Why would you leave a pit boss job for a surveillance job?

A. Like I said, politics. I’ve got some other things going also, nothing I want to get into.

Q. What about hosts?

A. Hosts are generally paid pretty well. At the top places, they get paid like a pit boss or shift manager. Maybe $80-100 thousand a year. The really top hosts can get a percentage of the losses of the big players they bring in. These hosts, if they’re bringing in whales, can make more than the casino manager.

Q. Do these top hosts have any actual salary, other than compensation for bringing in big players who lose?

A. They get compensated very well. They’re expected to bring in the top players, and that’s what they get paid for. The good ones really hustle, and they get paid very well. They also get fringe benefits, meaning gifts from their players. Some big players are very generous.

Q. If a host brings in a whale who lucks out and wins a million bucks on a trip, does that mean the host makes no money that month?

A. Like I say, they always get paid, and one lucky player won’t kill their pay check. If they’re any good, they have lots of players they’re bringing in. Good hosts make pretty good money. The best ones are at the high end of the pay scale.

Q. Is it ethical for hosts to bring their player lists to another casino if they move?

A. Ethical, no… but that’s how it’s done, and everyone accepts that. That’s how a host gets hired into a bigger joint. They go to player marketing and say, “I’ve got this list of big players from such-and-such casino, and I think I can get them over here. My players love me, and they’ll follow me. I’ve got all their names and numbers, et cetera.” Bang, they’re hired. If they produce the players, they get paid very well. That’s the way the business works.

Advice to Players

Q. What advice can you give BJF readers who want to avoid detection as card counters?

A. Try not to bring too much attention to yourself, especially with bet spreads. If you are getting heat try some camouflage plays. Also watch the floor supervisor, because if he goes to the phone he is not calling Miss Cleo.

Also, if you are getting heat, leave before the next shift starts. That way no information will be transferred about you.

If you are winning, try to pocket some of the chips without anyone seeing you. If you are wearing a baseball cap and never look up, that’s a big tell. Surveillance will wait until you go to the cage to get a nice Polaroid. If this worries you, then do not cash out — just leave with the chips. To write more of these could take an article in itself.

Q. I think my readers would be very interested in this article. Give us some more tips.

A. I think it’s your job to write that article. The main thing is this: don’t go crazy with your spreads. That’s the biggest give away. If your bets are moving with the count, you can’t hide it if you’re watched for any length of time.

Q. What do you look for when evaluating a person?

A. When I evaluate a person the first thing I look at is basic strategy. If a person does play good basic strategy the next area is bet spreads. I will count the deck down and see if the player’s bets are spreading according to the count. I also look for basic strategy deviations along with the spreads.

The same would go for shuffle tracking. For this, I look for the larger amounts of money and see how the hands are played. For example, if a player cuts and bets big off the top and receives a 12 vs. 2 and stands, but later on hits the same hand when the bets are smaller, then I know I might have a tracker. The examples could go on and on because each situation is always different. The best advice I can give is to be careful and know your surroundings.

Q. Do casinos ever do background checks on new players? Say an unknown player calls the casino and he wants to put fifty thousand in the cage to play blackjack. Will they do any investigation to find out who he is?

A. No. They will, of course, check Griffin and Biometrica if they have one of these services, and they will check with other casinos they are connected with. For instance, MGM will check with Mirage, et cetera. Probably, player marketing will ask the player what other casinos he has played at, and they may check with one or two of those joints.

Occasionally, somebody just shows up out of nowhere with fifty thousand to play blackjack, but usually he’ll have some kind of playing history. But if he’s not in Griffin or Biometrica, we don’t look any further than that. Why should we? If he’s betting like that, we’ll be monitoring his play from the get-go.

Q. Would the casino run any asset checks on such a player? If he has little or no history, are they interested in where this fifty thousand front money came from?

A. Why should we care? If he’s putting this up as front money, why ask questions? His money’s green, that’s all that matters. Now if he wants a fifty thousand credit line, without bringing in the money, that’s different. There will definitely be a credit check done on him. He’ll have to provide his bank information, et cetera, just as if he were applying for a fifty thousand dollar loan — which, technically, he is.

Q. Any final comments for Blackjack Forum readers?

A. Just be thankful that casino surveillance is on the low end of the pay scale. The surveillance guy watching you on the monitor probably knows a whole lot less than you do about what you’re doing, so you can fool him if you’re careful. Move around the casino a lot to make his job more difficult. He’s not paid well enough to really give a damn. And good luck! ♠

[For a detailed look at the views of the people working the eye-in-the-sky, see D.V. Cellini’s The Card Counter’s Guide to Casino Surveillance.]